Microsoft's Exit from W3C Group Stirs Dissent
"Two researchers attended part of a meeting a couple weeks ago in order to better understand its scope," the company said. "While Microsoft has decided not to formally participate in the choreography group at this time, it is not the only vehicle in which to impact and evaluate a set of technologies, and we will continue to stay actively involved on several different fronts, with varying degrees of participation and input relative to the standardization process."
The Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS) is one other such consortium Microsoft can turn to to work on standards.

Microsoft, IBM and BEA Systems are working on their own choreography specifications, WS-Coordination and WS-Transaction, as well as the Business Process Execution Language for Web Services (BPEL4WS), to articulate it.

But Don Deutsch, Oracle's vice president of standards strategy and architecture and W3C member, said Web services will achieve its expected level of success "only if the entire technology industry coalesces around a single set of standards." To that end, he feels Microsoft and IBM's actions to be an affront to the process that could lead to fragmentation.

"Any decision by Microsoft and IBM to start another Choreography standardization activity must be recognized as an attempt to drape themselves in the mantle of openness while refusing to share control of the specification with others in the industry," Deutsch told internetnews.com. "That is, trying to have their standards cake and making others eat it too!"

Stephen O'Grady, a senior analyst with research firm Redmonk who has spoken to people familiar with the happenings, discussed the issue with internetnews.com.

"I saw that move, and I must say that it doesn't bode well for the future of Web services. I was just chatting with [group marketing manager for Web services standards and technologies at Sun] Ed Julson and a few others from Sun about the state of Web services last week, and while I wasn't entirely convinced then with their pessimistic outlook, this is certainly another step in that direction."

"From all appearances, MS didn't agree with the way orchestration was to be handled, and having invested their own time and effort into an alternative chose that direction," he said. "But while many of the decisions by IBM, MS et al may make sense on an individual, case by case basis, they're shortsighted and have the potential to be very detrimental long term."

(Or maybe they're just tired of the anti-Microsoft “holy wars” A.I.)
http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/2169831